[governance] [bestbits] Call for Participation: Global Congress on Intellectual Property and the Public Interest, 2015
Jean-Louis FULLSACK
jlfullsack at orange.fr
Wed May 20 09:15:27 EDT 2015
Dear Anriette
Public interest " generally has different
> meanings for different people and in different countries, for lawyers,
> for activists"
Don't the same remarks/restrictions apply to Multistakeholderism ? Do you see e.g. Burkina Faso government on "equal footing" with Google or other GAFA-like enterprises ? Not to mention BF Civil society orgs ?
Best
Jean-Louis Fullsack
PS : BTW will you and/or APC take part in the next week WSIS Forum at Geneva ?
> Message du 20/05/15 12:05
> De : "Anriette Esterhuysen"
> A : "Internet Governance"
> Copie à : "BestBitsList" , "Forum at Justnetcoalition. Org" , "APC ICT policy advocacy" , "lori at apc.org"
> Objet : Re: [governance] [bestbits] Call for Participation: Global Congress on Intellectual Property and the Public Interest, 2015
>
> Dear all
>
> It is really good to see the reference to the APC.glossary. So happy
> that people are still using it. We developed it a long time ago when ICT
> terms were still evolving.
>
> The definition of the term 'multi-stakeholder' dates back to around
> 2004/5 when we were doing work at national level to facilitate
> collaboration around access to infrastructure, and also when we produced
> a guide to organising national WSIS consultations. So it reflects our
> history in working in a multi-stakeholder way on ICT for development
> issues at national level.
>
> I will ask the APC team to consider if the definition for
> multi-stakeholder needs to change. How do others feel?
>
> And on definition of public interest... good to point out that we don't
> have that in our glossary. We should add it. Public good , but we use it a lot in APC and therefore we should add it
> to our glossary.
>
> Anriette
>
> APC glossary entry on 'multi-stakeholder'
>
> A very broad term that describes groupings of civil society, the private
> sector, the public sector, the media and other stakeholders that come
> together for a common purpose. It is often used with words like
> “partnership” and “consultation”. In multi-stakeholder partnerships the
> partners have a shared understanding that they play different roles and
> have different purposes, but that they can pursue
> collective goals through collaboration and common activities to achieve
> such goals. These partnerships are voluntary, with participation driven
> by the perceived benefits they may see emerging from the process. Such
> partnerships are increasingly being used to challenge and lobby for
> change in policy processes.
>
> Style information: APC uses multi-stakeholder with a hyphen between
> “multi” and “stakeholder”.
>
>
>
> On 18/05/2015 05:45, Ang Peng Hwa (Prof) wrote:
> > Parminder,
> >
> > I did not just rely on Wikipedia. (That would be another n of 1.)
> >
> > My point was to reply to the question: Does "multistakeholder" now have
> > a stable definition?
> >
> >>The first entry is a Wiki where Norbert Bellow is quoted and where he
> > distinguishes between types even.
> >>The second entry is a glossary entry from APC.
> >>The third entry is an ICANNWiki entry.
> >
> > There is another common factor in the APC and the ICANNWiki entries:
> > there is no glossary entry for public interest in either of them.
> >
> > I leave you to interpret what that means.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Peng Hwa
> >
> > From: Parminder Singh
> > >
> > Date: Monday, 18 May 2015 11:28 am
> > To: Ang Peng Hwa >,
> > Williams Deirde > >, Internet Governance
> > >
> > Cc: BestBitsList > >, "Forum at Justnetcoalition. Org"
> > >
> > Subject: Re: [governance] Call for Participation: Global Congress on
> > Intellectual Property and the Public Interest, 2015
> >
> > Peng Hwa
> >
> > Since you seem to rely on wikipedia, before declaring that although
> > 'everyone knows what knows what multi stakeholder is' 'public interest
> > is a problematic concept' (both direct quotes from your email) did you
> > look up 'public interest' in wikipedia? Well, here it is
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_interest
> >
> > A comparative assessment of the two entries in wikipedia - respectively
> > on MSism (multistakeholderism) and public interest - would make clear
> > which one is clearer and less contested term.
> >
> > Which in turn clearly proves that an assertion in favour of 'clarity' of
> > the MS term with respect to the 'public interest' term is not based on
> > any kind of facts or on existing body of civilisational knoweldge . It
> > is merely ideological, which was my prior point. And the fact that a
> > regional IGF process takes such a bias as a given - and does not correct
> > itself even when the 'error' is pointed out - makes a important
> > political point, which is the political point that I have been trying to
> > make..
> >
> > parminder
> >
> > On Monday 18 May 2015 06:45 AM, Ang Peng Hwa (Prof) wrote:
> >> Deirdre,
> >>
> >> Google
> >> multistakeholder.https://www.google.com.sg/search?q=multistakeholder&oq=multistakeholder&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i60l3j69i65l2.2580j0j4&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=119&ie=UTF-8
> >>
> >> The first entry is a Wiki where Norbert Bellow is quoted and where he
> >> distinguishes between types even.
> >>
> >> The second entry is a glossary entry from APC.
> >>
> >> The third entry is an ICANNWiki entry.
> >>
> >> Like many words, there is a “core” meaning and moving beyond that,
> >> more than 50 shades of greying that keeps academics employed.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Ang Peng Hwa
> >>
> >> From: Williams Deirde >> >
> >> Date: Monday, 18 May 2015 2:04 am
> >> To: Internet Governance >> >, Ang Peng Hwa
> >> >
> >> Cc: Parminder Singh
> >> >, BestBitsList
> >> >,
> >> "Forum at Justnetcoalition. Org" >> >
> >> Subject: Re: [governance] Call for Participation: Global Congress on
> >> Intellectual Property and the Public Interest, 2015
> >>
> >> "Everyone knows what multistakeholder is. That’s easy."
> >>
> >> Respectfully, (I'm making a comment/asking for clarification, not
> >> trying to pick a quarrel), I have the impression that the problem is
> >> that everyone /doesn't/ know, or rather that everyone doesn't agree.
> >> "Multistakeholder" seems to me to have become a "Humpty Dumpty" word -
> >> 'When *I* use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone,
> >> 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'
> >> (from Alice Through the Looking Glass/Lewis Carroll
> >> /http://sabian.org/looking_glass6.php)
> >> I've begun to record, for my own benefit, when how and where the term
> >> is used, and to notice those contexts in which it is not used.
> >> Does "multistakeholder" now have a stable definition? Does
> >> "multistakeholderism"?
> >> Best wishes
> >> Deirdre
> >>
> >> On 17 May 2015 at 11:13, Ang Peng Hwa (Prof) >> > wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> >So, in fact, indeed the dominant groups involved with the IGF process do seem to think that 'public interest' is a problematic concept, and the idea of 'multistakeholder perspective' or interest is a positive political evolution over it!
> >>
> >> What a curious (mis)reading.
> >>
> >> First of all, I do not see how the APrIGF can be representative of
> >> “dominant groups”. We are, at best/worst an n of 1. Nah, I would
> >> not want to be one of the MASTERS of the UNIVERSE.
> >>
> >> Second, it is precisely because public interest is a problematic
> >> concept that the APrIGF is not using that notion. We have no time
> >> to discuss it before we roll out the meeting. Everyone knows what
> >> multistakeholder is. That’s easy. But public interest—we could
> >> discuss it as a panel if you wish.
> >>
> >> It would of course have to be next year.
> >>
> >> But if I say that it is next year, it is because of the deadline.
> >> Not because, once again, that public interest is not a problematic
> >> conception.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Peng Hwa
> >>
> >> From: Parminder Singh
> >> >
> >> Reply-To: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> >> "
> >> >> >, Parminder Singh
> >>
>
> >> Date: Sunday, 17 May 2015 9:46 pm
> >> To: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> >> "
> >> >> >, BestBitsList
> >> >> >, "Forum at Justnetcoalition.
> >> Org" >
> >> Subject: Re: [governance] Call for Participation: Global Congress
> >> on Intellectual Property and the Public Interest, 2015
> >>
> >> Interesting theme of this series of global congresses:
> >> 'Intellectual Property and the Public Interest' !
> >>
> >> Wonder if you ever thought of calling it "IP and the
> >> multistakeholder Interest' ?
> >>
> >> You all have have seen the discussion I recently had with Peng
> >> Hwa, head of the AP regional IGF process for many years, who
> >> strongly argued that public interest perspective is a very unclear
> >> concept but multistakeholder perspective or interest is much
> >> easier to establish.
> >>
> >> The discussion started when I objected to the call for workshops
> >> for the AP regional IGF which was categorical that every workshop
> >> proposal must incorporate a 'multistakeholder perspective'. I
> >> suggested that it be replaced by 'public interest'. This
> >> suggestion was not accepted. So, in fact, indeed the dominant
> >> groups involved with the IGF process do seem to think that 'public
> >> interest' is a problematic concept, and the idea of
> >> 'multistakeholder perspective' or interest is a positive political
> >> evolution over it!
> >>
> >> Friends, these are serious post-democratic developments to which,
> >> it is my duty of observe, most of the civil society involved in IG
> >> area are either a silent or active accomplices.
> >>
> >> Meanwhile, of course, I wait for arguments that Internet ( unlike
> >> intellectual property!?) is a bottom up , private, etc etc, thing,
> >> and therefore its governance has to be different.... Well, lets
> >> admit it, such an arugment really does not hold unless we are
> >> intent to be misled by it - the social artefact of the Internet is
> >> no more bottom up, private, etc that the social relationships of
> >> trade and property, whose governance continue to be done in
> >> democratic fashions... Time we claimed democratic governance for
> >> the Internet as well, and rubbish the post-democratic
> >> multistakeholderist ideas that are so solidly taking root in this
> >> space, for which the IG civil society will have to answer to history.
> >>
> >> Would anyone agree that the proposed global congress on IP and
> >> public interest to be held in a 'multistakeholder' way, with equal
> >> space for the big IP holders, as one always insists for an IG
> >> meeting... What really is the difference, other than that the
> >> discourse in the IG space has been captured by powerful forces
> >> before public interest actors could assert themselves. Civil
> >> society in this area must help in re-democraticing this area, and
> >> reclaiming 'public interest'.
> >>
> >> Meanwhile, my best wishes to the the organisers of this very
> >> importanr congress.
> >>
> >> In fact some of us have been talking about holding a global
> >> congress on 'Internet governance and public interest'. Happy to
> >> talk to those who may be interested.
> >>
> >> parminder
> >>
> >> On Friday 15 May 2015 03:21 PM, Geetha Hariharan wrote:
> >>> PFA the call for participation for the Global Congress on
> >>> Intellectual
> >>> Property and Public Interest.
> >>>
> >>> Apologies for cross-posting. Please do circulate to anyone you think
> >>> might be interested.
> >>>
> >>> Best,
> >>> Geetha.
> >>>
> >>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> >>> From: Swaraj Barooah
> >>> Date: Wed, May 13, 2015 at 1:05 PM
> >>> Subject: Call for Participation: Global Congress on Intellectual
> >>> Property and the Public Interest, 2015
> >>>
> >>> Dear all,
> >>>
> >>> We are pleased to announce the call for participation for the fourth
> >>> edition of the Global Congress on Intellectual Property and the
> >>> Public
> >>> Interest (“Global Congress”). The theme for this year’s Congress
> >>> will be
> >>> “Three Decades of Openness; Two Decades of TRIPS.” We are now
> >>> inviting
> >>> applications to participate in the Congress, including session
> >>> participation and presentations. We are also welcoming proposals for
> >>> panels and workshops.
> >>>
> >>> The application form is available now at
> >>> [http://form.jotformpro.com/form/50854976184973?] Please note
> >>> that this
> >>> form is for application purposes, and does not amount to
> >>> confirmation of
> >>> participation. The registrations for the plenary sessions, which are
> >>> open to the public, will open closer to the date of the Global
> >>> Congress.
> >>>
> >>> Deadlines
> >>>
> >>> August 1st: Priority Deadline for Applications- Applicants will be
> >>> considered on a rolling basis, with applications made by August 1st
> >>> being given first consideration. Applications after August 1st to
> >>> receive travel assistance will be considered only under exceptional
> >>> circumstances (these details will be collected in a subsequent form).
> >>>
> >>> November 1st: All applications for session participation and paper
> >>> submissions will close on November 1st.
> >>>
> >>> Application Information
> >>>
> >>> For applications to participate/host: Applications to present or host
> >>> workshops shall be considered based on the proposals to be
> >>> submitted in
> >>> the form.
> >>>
> >>> For applications to attend sessions:Applications to attend
> >>> sessions as
> >>> discussants will be considered based on the statement of purpose
> >>> and/or
> >>> any other relevant information provided by the applicant.
> >>>
> >>> Limited travel grants to cover accommodation and/or travel to the
> >>> Congress will be available, with priority to those from developing
> >>> countries.
> >>>
> >>> Background, Theme and Expected Outcomes
> >>>
> >>> The Global Congress on Intellectual Property and the Public
> >>> Interest is
> >>> the most significant event on the calendar for scholars and policy
> >>> advocates working on intellectual property from a public interest
> >>> perspective. By sharing their research and strategies, the network of
> >>> experts and activists supported by the Global Congress are
> >>> empowered to
> >>> put forward a positive agenda for policy reform. The Global Congress
> >>> began in Washington D.C. in 2011, moved to Rio de Janeiro in
> >>> 2012, and
> >>> was held in Cape Town in 2013. The fourth Global Congress will now be
> >>> held in New Delhi, in December 2015. The event would be the largest
> >>> convening of public interest-oriented intellectual property
> >>> practitioners ever held in Asia, and would help link in the
> >>> world's most
> >>> populous region to these global debates around how intellectual
> >>> property
> >>> policy can best serve the public interest.
> >>>
> >>> The fourth edition of the Global Congress, which brings research,
> >>> civil
> >>> society, industry and regulatory and policy-making communities
> >>> together
> >>> for active, intense engagement on key public-interest intellectual
> >>> property issues. Opportunities for these groups to interact are
> >>> rare but
> >>> valuable; and have been proven to lead to successful policy outcomes.
> >>> The 4thedition of the Congress, slated to be held in December,
> >>> 2015 in
> >>> New Delhi seeks to be one such opportunity.
> >>>
> >>> The theme for the 2015 Congress is Three Decades of Openness; Two
> >>> Decades of TRIPS-coming at a pivotal time for reflection,
> >>> revision, and
> >>> further strategizing. Specifically, the 2015 Congress seeks to
> >>> produce
> >>> three outcomes- first, the mobilization of existing scholarly
> >>> research
> >>> directly into the hands of civil society advocates, business
> >>> leaders and
> >>> policy makers, leading to evidence-based policies and practices;
> >>> second,the collaborative identification of urgent, global and local
> >>> research priorities and generation of a joint research/advocacy
> >>> agenda;
> >>> and third, the solidification of an inter-disciplinary,
> >>> cross-sector and
> >>> global networked community of experts focused on public interest
> >>> aspects
> >>> of IP policy and practice.
> >>>
> >>> Participation Opportunities
> >>>
> >>> Discussions at the Global Congress will be carried out in the form of
> >>> plenary sessions, thematic tracks, cross-track sessions, and the
> >>> room of
> >>> scholars. Participation is invited for the thematic track sessions,
> >>> cross-track sessions and the room of scholars.
> >>>
> >>> The thematic tracks at the Global Congress are: 1) Openness, 2)
> >>> Access
> >>> to Medicines, 3) User Rights, 4) IP and Development.
> >>>
> >>> Cross-track sessions will feature research that cuts across tracks in
> >>> order to facilitate engagement between tracks on themes of mutual
> >>> interest.
> >>>
> >>> The Room of Scholars will feature presentations of research
> >>> outputs such
> >>> as draft works or white papers that may not fit directly within the
> >>> thematic tracks but fall within the overall theme of the Global
> >>> Congress
> >>> .
> >>>
> >>> Participation could be in the form of presenting / discussing
> >>> conference
> >>> papers or policy briefs, or by conducting workshops where they
> >>> may share
> >>> their own work and solicit feedback from peers, during the
> >>> aforementioned sessions.
> >>>
> >>> The application form for participation is available now
> >>> athttp://form.jotformpro.com/form/50854976184973?. Please forward
> >>> this
> >>> invitation to interested lists and individuals. For more
> >>> information or
> >>> questions, you may contact globalcongress2015 at gmail.com
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> .
> >>>
> >>> Organisation
> >>>
> >>> The Centre for Internet and Society
> >>> serves as the
> >>> convenor of the fourth Global Congress on Intellectual Property and
> >>> Public Interest, carried out in cooperation withNational Law
> >>> University,
> >>> Delhi .
> >>>
> >>> The implementing partners arethe
> >>> American
> >>> Assembly
> >>> at Columbia University in New
> >>> York,Open A.I.R
> >>> ., and theProgram on
> >>> Information Justice and Intellectual Property
> >>> at
> >>> American University Washington College of Law in Washington DC.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On behalf of the organizing committee,
> >>>
> >>> Swaraj Barooah
> >>>
> >>> Swaraj Paul Barooah
> >>> Project Manager, "Global Congress"
> >>> (Global Congress on IP and the Public Interest, 2015)
> >>>
> >>> Editor-in-Chief, SpicyIP.com
> >>>
> >>> Founder, Know-GAP
> >>> Twitter: @swarajpb
> >>>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > ____________________________________________________________
> >> > You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> >> > governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> >> > To be removed from the list, visit:
> >> > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
> >> >
> >> > For all other list information and functions, see:
> >> > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> >> > To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
> >> > http://www.igcaucus.org/
> >> >
> >> > Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
> >>
> >>
> >> SG50
> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> CONFIDENTIALITY: This email is intended solely for the person(s)
> >> named and may be confidential and/or privileged. If you are not
> >> the intended recipient, please delete it, notify us and do not
> >> copy, use, or disclose its contents.
> >> Towards a sustainable earth: Print only when necessary. Thank you.
> >>
> >> ____________________________________________________________
> >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> >> governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> >>
> >> To be removed from the list, visit:
> >> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
> >>
> >> For all other list information and functions, see:
> >> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> >> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
> >> http://www.igcaucus.org/
> >>
> >> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir
> >> William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
> >
> >
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
> > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
> > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
> >
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
> http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150520/fa9f0622/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
For all other list information and functions, see:
http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
http://www.igcaucus.org/
Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
More information about the Governance
mailing list